Caracterización de las políticas sociales en general

Narrative inquiry is based on the assumption that stories enable us to make sense of highly stimulating and stressful events, experiences, feelings and emotions (Bruner, 1990). It has been identified that the relationship between our understanding of ourselves (identity) and social power relations can inform our understanding of the psychology of trauma (Crossley, 2003).

Rather than mirror reality, stories are constantly open to change. They are embedded within complex and often competing socio-political relationships (Crossley, 2000), including dominant discourses of patriarchy that produce, for

28

example, mother blame. Through narrative inquiry, we can begin to unravel the impact of oppression (Riessman, 1993), and violence on those who live its effects.

Born from the soil of discontent (Fine, 2007b, p. 613)

From a review of the forms of narrative inquiry, there appears to be many interpretations of the narrative turn, however it is commonly assumed that it was instigated by a burning need to empower the voices of those who are oppressed; to create change in society and politics where numbers and statistics have not made a significant impact on social change (Crossley, 2000; Riessman, 1993). It enables us to bring volume to the voices of those who are silenced through social power relations; it is a method for expressing stories of pain and oppression to bring about political change.

According to the literature all social science research is narrative, including the research process (Sarbin, 1986). The narrative history of psychological knowledge production that legitimates quantitative research devoid of socio-political context has oppressed the experience or silenced those in the most pain (Fine, 2007a). The development of narrative inquiry has been driven by a greater need for social justice and responsibility. It has been described as the bridge between research and the community (Fine, 2007a), a force which binds and brings about the transformation of knowledge into social action. It has been argued throughout the literature, like life itself, narrative is everywhere; it knows no borders, it is international, trans-cultural and trans-historical and it is embedded within everything we know to be true (Barthes, 1977). Because of the relevance of narrative, and the power of experience, researchers have learnt the potential of bringing together voices which are different in and of themselves and also share similar problems within oppressive powers (Mills, 1959). By appreciating and analysing the telling of stories, greater awareness of the oppressive forces of socio- political power can be recognised; personal narratives are now being taken seriously due to their ability to represent social realities away from a single truth to a representation of multiple and diverse experiences within social power relations that produce them (Blackman & Walkerdine, 2001; Squire, 2004).

29 Narrative Analysis

Events do not present themselves as stories, but it is the experience of an event that becomes a story. (Hiles & Cermak, 2008, p. 149)

Within narrative inquiry, the objective of the study is the story itself (Riessman, 1993). Rather than being interested in facts and measurements located within individuals, narrative inquiry is concerned with how we tell ourselves through lived experience within the social power relations within which we are embedded (Crossley, 2003). In this way, it is the meaning of the story to the experience, the way we construct histories and our on-going relationships within available storylines, that is privileged.

How individuals recount their histories- what they emphasize and omit, their stance as protagonist or victims, the relationship the story establishes between teller and audience – all shape what individuals can claim of their own lives. Personal stories are not merely a way of telling someone about one’s life; they are the means by which identities may be fashioned. (Rosenwald & Ochberg, 1992, p. 1)

Rather than reduce the complexities of lived experience, narrative inquiry is concerned with how individuals make their experiences meaningful. Narratives enable a sense of order, meaning and coherence in lived experiences that configure everyday life (Crossley, 2000). Instead of questioning what has happened, as researchers we are asking why the story is being told this way (Riessman, 1993). Understanding that narratives are knowledge of lived experience, a narrative analysis aims to represent common elements of stories and configure them into a meaningful or unified whole, through a process that leads toward an endpoint (Polkinghorne, 1995). Meaning is created through language use within relationships; what we know is not produced by an individual subject (Gergen, 2001). People make sense of their lives, day-to-day experiences, actions and reasons for events. Stories enable us to bring coherency to how we understand our lived lives, our knowledge of ourselves (Crossley, 2003; Fine, 2007b). The

30

narrative production of identity (as we understand ourselves to be) is enacted through its relationship with other stories, and this may produce resiliencies.

Positioning theory

Research suggests that positioning theory is necessary to narrative research because conversations involve telling stories from particular experiences (A. Morgan, 2002). How we tell our accounts of particular events are also iterations of previous conversations that both enable and constrain knowledge of who we are and how we come to know ourselves. The stories we produce depend on what can be told through available subject positions in a particular moral order.

Positioning theory enables us to make sense of the production of our identities through our socio-political locations and power relations (R. Harre & van Langenhove, 1999). Research reports positioning as the discursive process that locates subjects in conversations as coherent beings in mutually produced storylines (R. Harre, Pilkerton-Cairnie, Moghaddam, Rothbart, & Sabat, 2009). Positioning theory and narrative analysis enable us to understand the ways that stories come to be meaningful within narratives of social power that are embedded in our everyday talk. In turn we understand ourselves in relation to each other. In this way, the social meaning of our stories is entwined with the social force of conversation (B. Davies & Harre, 1990). Recent research states that positioning theory is a way in which we can “speak ourselves into our communities, producing ourselves as subjects and communities of voices simultaneously and reproducing them in various versions through multiple relationships” (A. Morgan, 2002, p. 468), which opens the possibility for counter narratives to be told. Subject positions carry particular rights, duties and obligations (B. Davies & Harre, 1990) within storylines that are enabled and constrained through available socio-political narratives and power relations.

Within relationships of domination and subordination a subject may be more or less constrained by what is possible through socially sanctioned storylines, where the rights of the oppressor controls the duties of the oppressed (R. Harre & Slocum, 2003). Within patriarchy, subject positions with the right to enact violence control the subject position available to the oppressed; a duty to accept the abuse without

31 question (Ofreneo & Montiel, 2010). The differences in the rights and privileges between the oppressor and oppressed can be understood as unequal access to social power.

Narrative inquiry in this study seeks to address how the participants’ understand

themselves through their storying of the effects of their narrative histories of violence. What are the critical moments and influences in their lives as they (re)negotiate their future relationships? How are participants positioned within socio-political narratives of violence and how are they enabled or limited by their subject position and the enactment of it? How do stories of resilience open possibilities for counter narratives?

Method of Narrative Inquiry

Narrative analysis does not provide researchers direct access to an individual’s

experience (Riessman, 1993). The narrative that is produced is embedded in the relationship between the participant and the researcher, for a particular purpose. In this research, I had particular questions that informed my own position, in the construction of the research question, the co-construction of the interview, transcription and the analysis. In this way, the research process itself adds to the interpretation of the analysis.

The five levels of representation facilitate the process of narrative analysis and help us to understand how the research process impacts upon our final understandings (Riessman, 1993).

32

Primary Experience

Figure 4: Riessman’s Five Levels of Representation(Riessman, 1993, p. 10)

The first level of representation is attending to the experience. This occurs as the experience is unfolding and describes what the person notices about the experience; what they attend to and what feelings are evoked. In this selective process, what is noticed will depend on other experiences and interactions that are meaningful to understanding this experience.

The second level of representation is telling about the experience. This stage describes the point at which the individual talks to another about their experience, drawing on their socio-political context. The interview, as a process of talking and listening, asking and answering questions, storylines are co constructed. An interviewee imposes order on their telling within the constraints of the interview. There is an inevitable gap between the telling and the experience itself (Riessman, 1993).

The third level of representation is transcribing the experience. This is an important phase of the analysis as the narrative makes a transition from being that of the teller to becoming subject to the researcher’s interpretations. This phase involves changing the spoken narrative into a written one. Because the interviewee has deprived us of aspects of the experience, and because we as the researcher’s choose to select only certain parts of the storyline to attend to, we create gaps within the experience. As the researcher, I was interested in critical moments and influences within socio-political narratives of violence that enabled or constrained stories of resilience. The transcription required decisions about how much detail to

READING (5) ANALYZING (4) TRANSCRIBING (3)

TELLING (2) ATTENDING (1)

33 include in the meaning making. Language is neither neutral, nor transparent, and therefore the analysis is an interpretive process (Riessman, 1993).

The fourth level of representation is analysing the experience. This section of the analysis involves the identification of themes, or storylines, throughout the narratives. Decisions are made about order, style and how the segments will be presented (Riessman, 1993). Ultimately the goal is to create a meta-story which demonstrates the storylines found throughout these experiences; a hybrid is created

through editing and reshaping, described as a ‘false’ story (Behar, 1993). Once again, it is at this point that the values, culture and context of the researcher, their epistemological position, that informs the method, and the identification of storylines that form the analysis (Riessman, 1993), a form of summation of the narratives produced and turning the stories into a hybrid narrative.

The final level of representation is reading the experience. This phase, being the final, is when the reader encounters the narrative and draws their own conclusions and interpretations from the text based upon their own historical, socio-political context. Because of the subjectivity of the text, it has been argued that there is no master narrative of an experience, but rather a narrative stands on moving ground where it is constantly subject to new interpretations (Clifford, 1986). In this way, knowledge is co-produced by participants, researchers and readers.

METHOD

Ethical Considerations

A pre-narrative has been described as occurring when one is unable to discuss particularly painful memories due to the oppression and patriarchal control that has

taken place chronically throughout the individual’s life (Riessman, 1993). This can arise due to a lack of language to depict the issue, or the opportunity to safely speak about these stressful experiences has not been available. This is an important aspect of narrative inquiry which is worth considering in the current study as it asks participants to talk about how their histories of violence in childhood have impacted on their lives.

34

Approval for the ethical conduct for this research was obtained from the Massey University Human Ethics Committee: Southern B, Application 12/10.

As is ethical practice with research conducted in New Zealand, and as discussed in chapter 1, cultural specificity and diversity was important to this study. The criterion for inclusion in the study was the shared experience of exposure to domestic violence. After much consultation, I developed a protocol that was as inclusive of diversity as possible and reflected a consideration of the concept of Manaakitanga, understood here, as a relationship of respect and care to ensure the dignity of the participants is not compromised. This practice is compatible with the design of this research through a process that values the participants as the knowers of their own experience, within their socio-cultural locations, and the researcher is reflexive on their own position.

Recruitment

Individuals were recruited for this research through employing a snowballing technique. Recruitment of participants through snowballing is widely used in qualitative methods in the social sciences as a response to sampling oppressed or minority groups. It enables the researcher to access an increasing number of participants through contact with an initial participant.

Initially, I notified both my peers and family members regarding the aims of my research and asked them to inform anyone they knew who may be suitable for the research. From that point my peers and family members either provided potential participants with my contact details or the research information sheet and it was left up to the participants to make contact with me; participants needed to volunteer into the study and make the first contact so that they did not feel any pressure to participate.

Participants were not restricted to living in certain cities or countries. Due to the availability of technology, if I could not visit participants on a face to face basis, interviews were conducted using Skype. Due to safety reasons, a requirement of participation was that the participants were over 18 years old; for ethical safety I

35 also needed to ensure the participant had not been living with the perpetrator for at least two years.

Recruitment of participants was surprisingly easy, and once people became aware of the research there were several requests to take part. Once potential participants made contact with me, either through my cell phone or via email, I promptly contacted them and sent them the information sheet, providing them with an opportunity to carefully consider what the research would require of them. Once I received confirmation of their willingness to participate, I organised a time and location that would best suit the participant in order to conduct the interview. While some interviews were conducted in private homes, others were conducted in more public environments such as cafes and libraries. Only one participant failed to show up to the interview but later apologised and provided me with the reason that they no longer wished to bring up and talk about past memories.

Having read the information sheet and signalled interest in participation, all of the participants gave written and verbal informed consent and were made aware of the stringent confidentiality provided for within this study. Participants were made aware that the interview may stop or the voice recorder may be switched off at any time should they request. I located myself in an informal position so as to depower myself while also providing a small amount of self-disclosure to help the participant relax and feel more comfortable prior to the interview commencing. Participants were aware of my position both as a researcher and as without a history of violence as a child. This was important to the ethical conduct of this study, as a negotiation of the power relationship between researcher and participant, especially where their position as experts of their own experience was valued.

The 9 individuals who chose to participate in this research came from diverse backgrounds and upbringings. All made either direct contact with me or through a third party who was an acquaintance of mine in some form or another.

Initially it was determined that 12 participants would be needed for sufficient data saturation with this research, however after 8 interviews it was apparent that data saturation and high repetition of storylines was already beginning to occur, and

36

there was no further recruitment after 9 participant interviews were completed. It has been discussed throughout the literature that data saturation with narrative analysis can occur through the repetition of stories and themes with large amounts of interview data; while it is difficult to achieve saturation with a small sample, overly large samples can lead to an increased difficulty in achieving meaningful analysis (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2007).

Interviews

All participants chose the location for the interview to ensure their comfort. In regard to my own safety, my supervisor was informed of each interview and the location before they commenced; she was also advised when the interview had been completed and I had finished with the participant. The interviews took between 30 and 120 minutes and the length depended upon the participant’s desire to discuss certain aspects of their experience. When I felt that the interview was coming to a close, I thoughtfully asked the participant if there was anything further that they would like to discuss before we closed the interview.

The interviews were conversational, although I did have questions that related to childhood experiences and relationships with parents and siblings and wider social relationships. I did not follow the focus questions in a lineal way. Through the interview process I listened for storylines that developed and asked further questions, where appropriate, to gain further insight into how particular stories were meaningful. Conversational interviews provide a setting in which conversation is enabled to flow without restriction while still being guided by the ultimate goals of the research. In other words, the questions I brought to the interviews were

modified through the participants’ responses. This framework was important as it enabled unique or unexpected turns in the conversation. In this way, the relationship between the researcher and participants co-produced the storylines during the interview.

Once the interview was completed, all of the participants engaged in general conversation that gave both them and myself an opportunity to discuss, in a relaxed manner how they felt regarding the interview. No participants regarded themselves as feeling distressed after the interview, although they were made aware that I could

37 put them in touch with an agency that would be able to provide them with suitable support had they done so. Many of the participants felt really positive after the interview and could only thank me for the opportunity to openly discuss their experiences in a safe environment.

The interviews were voice recorded, however participants had the opportunity to request that the voice recorder be switched off at any point throughout the interview. By voice recording the interview, it enabled me to be completely involved within the conversation as opposed to taking notes; the interview was then transcribed once the interview was complete.